Well, if they're democratic they should let the people (in which case my self-insert would apply) decide what to do. But a reasonable government could, for example, negotiate an immediate ceasefire and acquiesce to the winning side's demands to prevent further bloodshed. Or it could grab teenagers off the street and tentative migrants and send them to their deaths. Obviously, I already know that the Ukrainian government and their NATO allies prefer the latter, but we shouldn't pretend there weren't other options.

Edit:

What would you do if you were their absolute ruler? Surrender?

Well, yes? Assuming I give even half a fuck about people's lives, I'd prefer a negotiated peace instead of this shitshow any day. Russia's demands aren't even that hard to meet, they're just dragging this out for profit at this point.

Even though we don't agree on these things, I think that's a nice thing of you to say. Thanks!

I'm quoting again:

The new draft law on the mobilization of workers is intended to "ensure the functioning of the national economy under martial law", in the words of those drafting the law. It is noteworthy that in early August, Ukraine began to talk about a likely ban against military conscripts leaving the country for three years following an eventual end to military hostilities and martial law. Just such a proposal was recently made by Vadym Denysenko [...], head of the Ukrainian Institute for the Future and a former advisor to the head of the Ukrainian Ministry of Internal Affairs. Denysenko said, "I am sure that even after the war it will be necessary to extend the ban on men traveling abroad for at least another three years. Otherwise, we simply will not survive as a nation."

Please illuminate me in your wisdom, how banning people from leaving while conscripting them to either fight in the front or forced labour is not a form slavery. Whose lives are being saved by arresting people trying to flee the country?